§ 63G-4-403 — Judicial review -- Formal adjudicative proceedings -- Final agency action.

Utah § 63G-4-403

• Jurisdiction: Utah
• Title 63G: General Government
• Ch. 63G-4: Administrative Procedures Act
• Part 63G-4-4: Judicial Review

Text

(1) As provided by statute, the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction to review a final agency action resulting from a formal adjudicative proceeding originating from an entity described in Sections 78A-3-102 and 78A-4-103.
(2) An order or decree from a formal adjudicative proceeding is a final agency action if:
(2)(a) the administrative decision-making has reached a stage where judicial review will not disrupt the orderly process of adjudication;
(2)(b) rights or obligations have been determined by, or legal consequences flow from, the order or decree; and
(2)(c) the order or decree, in whole or in part, is not preliminary, preparatory, procedural, or intermediate with regard to subsequent agency action.
(3) (3)(a) To seek judicial review of final agency action resulting from formal adjudicative proceedings, the petitioner shall file a petition for review of agency action with the appropriate appellate court in the form required by the appellate rules of the appropriate appellate court.
(3)(b) The appellate rules of the appropriate appellate court shall govern all additional filings and proceedings in the appellate court.
(4) The contents, transmittal, and filing of the agency's record for judicial review of formal adjudicative proceedings are governed by the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure, except that:
(4)(a) all parties to the review proceedings may stipulate to shorten, summarize, or organize the record; and
(4)(b) the appellate court may tax the cost of preparing transcripts and copies for the record:
(4)(b)(i) against a party who unreasonably refuses to stipulate to shorten, summarize, or organize the record; or
(4)(b)(ii) according to any other provision of law.
(5) The appellate court shall grant relief only if, on the basis of the agency's record, it determines that a person seeking judicial review has been substantially prejudiced by any of the following:
(5)(a) the agency action, or the statute or rule on which the agency action is based, is unconstitutional on its face or as applied;
(5)(b) the agency has acted beyond the jurisdiction conferred by any statute;
(5)(c) the agency has not decided all of the issues requiring resolution;
(5)(d) the agency has erroneously interpreted or applied the law;
(5)(e) the agency has engaged in an unlawful procedure or decision-making process, or has failed to follow prescribed procedure;
(5)(f) the persons taking the agency action were illegally constituted as a decision-making body or were subject to disqualification;
(5)(g) the agency action is based upon a determination of fact, made or implied by the agency, that is not supported by substantial evidence when viewed in light of the whole record before the court; or
(5)(h) the agency action is:
(5)(h)(i) an abuse of the discretion delegated to the agency by statute;
(5)(h)(ii) contrary to a rule of the agency;
(5)(h)(iii) contrary to the agency's prior practice, unless the agency justifies the inconsistency by giving facts and reasons that demonstrate a fair and rational basis for the inconsistency; or
(5)(h)(iv) otherwise arbitrary or capricious.

Legislative History

Amended by Chapter 190, 2025 General Session